Sentences with phrase «driver test dummy»

The 2008 model of the Scirocco received a five star safety rating from EuroNCAP even after the driver test dummy's head hit the steering wheel when the airbag bottomed out.

Not exact matches

The nonprofit says the driver's side seat belt did not have enough tension to protect the crash test dummy's head.

The child - sized dummy has just helped me test the first in - car system that can sense an imminent collision with pedestrians and brake automatically if the driver doesn't.

During this stringent front - overlap test, the IIHS found that the 2016 Kia Sorento had minimal intrusion into the driver's space, and significantly improved control of the dummy's motion compared with the 2014 - 2015 Kia Sorento, which received «Poor» ratings for the small overlap front crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

Driver — In both tests, measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the driver dummy's head was protected from being hit by hard structures by the side airbags in the Institute's test.

IIHS says the crash test for Mercedes» C - Class left the dummy's foot wedged beneath the brake pedal, while the driver's door opened on the A4 and the CC.

Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head leaning well outward and approaching the window sill.

However, an improvement in the driver dummy's pelvis / leg rating from «marginal» to «acceptable» would yield an overall «good» rating in the side test.

Driver — Although the intruding barrier did not hit the dummy's head in this test, the head was not protected from contacts outside the vehicle.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well in the Institute's test.

Likewise, in the side barrier test, the head of the dummy representing a 10 - year - old child, seated behind the driver, struck the roof frame in the Mercedes - Benz C - Class Cabriolet as the side airbag did not fully cover the impact area.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space wasn't maintained well.

Driver dummy injury and head protection ratings for the 2009 model are assigned by the Institute as part of side crash test verification.

The driver's space was maintained well in both tests, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well (Institute test car shown).

Driver — In the test of the 2009 model, measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well (Institute test vehicle shown).

In the test without optional side curtain airbags, the intruding barrier struck the driver dummy's head.

Smeared greasepaint (inset photo at bottom right) indicates where the dummy's head dipped below the windowsill and hit the driver door during the offset test.

Aside from the intruded door frame when the door hinges were sheared off in the second test (shown), the dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

The movement of the driver dummy was reasonably well controlled during the frontal test.

In the side impact test for both models, measures taken from both the driver dummy and the passenger dummy seated in the rear seat indicated low risk of significant injuries in a real - world crash like this one.

Driver — Measures taken from the dummies in the two tests indicate that rib fractures would be possible in a crash of this severity.

Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head hitting the window sill.

«In the side test of the Neon, the barrier hit the heads of both the driver and rear passenger dummies,» Lund points out.

In the full width frontal test, the Touran scored maximum points for its protection of the driver dummy, with good protection of all critical body areas.

In the side test, the driver dummy's head struck the windowsill.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the driver dummy's head was protected from being hit by hard structures by the side curtain airbag (second test shown).

In the test without the head protection airbag, the heads of the driver and rear passenger dummies were struck by the hood of the pickup truck.

The Institute downgraded the Smart's structural rating from good to acceptable, but the opening didn't appear to affect dummy movement during the test, and injury measures on the driver dummy were low.

A vehicle's overall evaluation is based on measurements of intrusion into the occupant compartment, injury measures recorded on a Hybrid III dummy in the driver seat, and analysis of slow - motion film to assess how well the restraint system controlled dummy movement during the test.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the first crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained well.

In the full - width rigid barrier test, the pelvis of the driver dummy slipped beneath the lap section of the seatbelt and protection of this area was rated as poor.

Revised for 2011, the frontal crash safety test incorporates a crash dummy representative of a small - size female in the front passenger's seat and, as before, an average - size male crash dummy in the driver's seat.

Protection of the driver dummy in the same test was good or adequate.

Driver — Measures from the dummies in the two tests, taken together, indicate that rib fractures and / or internal organ injuries would be possible in a crash of this severity.

The driver's seat became detached from the structure and moved sideways, together with the lower part of the test dummy.

In the full - width rigid barrier test, protection of the driver dummy was good for all critical parts of the body and that of the rear passenger was good apart from the chest, protection of which was adequate.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the second crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

Despite some buckling of the A-pillar and roof rail, the dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates the driver's survival space was maintained reasonably well.

Intrusion into the driver's space was reasonably well controlled in the second test, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

For example, the 4 - door Civic earns a good rating in the Institute's side test and is a Top Safety Pick while the 2 - door version is rated acceptable in the side test because of higher forces on the driver dummy's chest, abdomen, and pelvis.

In the full width rigid barrier test, protection of the driver dummy was good for all critical body areas while, for the rear passenger, protection of the neck was adequate and that of the chest was marginal.

In the test, which was conducted on an Equinox but applies to the Terrain as well, the driver space was well - maintained, and the dummy's movement was well - controlled.

The dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the crash test indicates the driver's upper survival space was maintained well, but there was more footwell intrusion than is desirable.

Protection of all critical body areas was good for the driver dummy in this test.

The driver's survival space was maintained well, as indicated by the dummy's position in relation to the steering wheel and instrument panel after the second crash test.